Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : InfoSpace (INSP): Where GNET went! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: option007 who wrote (6989)	6/6/1999 10:38:00 PM
From: Dr. Zax	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28311

Thank you option, For a well thought out, rational and elegant expression of your opinion on GNET. Welcome aboard!!! Dr. Zax

To: option007 who wrote (6989)	6/6/1999 10:42:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

option007, we have already discussed the situation with AOL and the portland ruling and frankly if this was your key concern about gnet stock I suspect you would have pounded away on it previously. I suspect this is something you just picked up from the aol board and decided to relay here, old news. Also please comment on Meekers "20% downside" comment you were referring to... and how that applies to gnet. As you know she doesn't cover gnet.... was she talking about the internet index or just her basket of stocks or what? The analysts I have heard predict a mild cpi figure and hence no tightening, or perhaps the fed will "recover" the promotional ¼ pt we got last year (which won't do much) - do you have any hard evidence to suggest anything otherwise in regard to your expectations about cpi? Sorry to be relentless on these issues but I've had to slog through 30 or so posts from you with every soundbyte imaginable as to why gnet will decline (with no justification). I think this stock doesn't move like the others because it has no analyst coverage, primarily due to its "bb" roots.

To: option007 who wrote (6989)	6/6/1999 10:55:00 PM
From: Sleeper	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28311

Congratulations, 007 for proving yourself to be an uninformed hypster. Federal Judge Panner accepted Portland's motion for summary judgment based upon it's right to regulate the transfer of franchises, such as the one TCI had and AT&T has now bought. He did not review nor rule upon the necessity of AT&T to open up all of it's BB cable network to any and all ISP's, let alone granting access to AOL. And I quote from the ruling: ATT/TCI would violate the open access condition if it failed to provide equivalent access, but not if it failed to use a particular technology to provide the access. AND The Cable Act explicitly protects local governmental authority to adopt ordinances for consumer protection and customer service. Section 632, 47 U.S.C. §552. Further elaboration may be found on the @HOME board and I am sure they would be equally as impressed as we are with your "important information". Do us a favor- go back to the movies, and this time-make it a double feature! Sleeper

To: option007 who wrote (6989)	6/6/1999 10:59:00 PM
From: BillCh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

I would've thought it a plus that AT+T Broadband has to open its networks to smaller competitors like Go2net!